FY 2003 Middle Snake proposal 32012

Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary

Reviews and Recommendations

Additional documents

Title	Type
32012 Narrative	Narrative
32012 Sponsor Response to the ISRP	Response
32012 Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Implement Best Management Practices to improve riparian habitat and upland conditions within the Clover Creek watershed.
Proposal ID	32012
Organization	Bruneau River Soil Conservation District (BRSCD)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	David F. Ferguson
Mailing address	P. O. Box 790 Boise, ID 83701
Phone / email	2083328654 / dferguso@agri.state.id.us
Manager authorizing this project	Mark Frost, Chairman, BRSCD
Review cycle	Middle Snake
Province / Subbasin	Middle Snake / Bruneau
Short description	Enhance riparian and upland habitat and reduce nonpoint source pollution within the Clover Creeek watershed through the development of a Coordinated Resource Management Plan on private, state, and federal land, focussing on private land improvements.
Target species	Redband Trout, Sage Grouse

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
42.3833	-115.4565	Upper area of Clover Crossing Allotment & Clover Flat Ranch
42.4885	-115.4565	Lower area of Clover Crossing Allotment & Clover Flat Ranch

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
9.6.2.1 Habitat actions

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment
2001	Landowners (Bachmans) installed 3 offsite watering facilities on Clover Flat Ranch
2001	IDEQ completed a TMDL (EPA approved) for the Bruneau River Subbasin, which includes Clover Creek.
2001	Bachmans are collecting water samples in coordination with IDEQ on the Clover Flat Ranch for TMDL purposes.
1999	An interdisciplinary NRCS team evaluated the riparian areas on Clover Flat Ranch using the Proper Functioning Condition, Stream Visual Assessment Protocol, Streambank Erosion Evaluation, & Rosgen Stream Classification assessment protocols
1999	A NRCS range conservationist inventoried the rangeland within the Clover Crossing Allotment & Clover Flat Ranch
1999	An environmental assessment was completed on a portion of the Clover Flat Ranch prior to the construction of the new bridge, diversion and fish ladder on Clover Creek (Clover - Three Creek Rd.).
1999	Clover Crossing permittee (Bachmans) and BLM created 2 riparian pastures to improve riparian habitat within livestock water gap areas on Clover Creek
1993	Clover Crossing permittee (Bachmans) and BLM installed 1 riparian exclosure on Clover Creek and 2 offsite watering facilities within the Clover Crossing allotment.
1984	Clover Crossing permittee (Bachmans) and BLM installed 2 riparian exclosures on Clover Creek and 8 offsite watering facilities within the Clover Crossing allotment.

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
98002	Snake River Native Salmonid Assessment	Data share & coordination of monitoring activities

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost
1. Continue developing CRMP with landowner & managers to address and correct the riparian and upland resource problems (NEPA requirements met through NRCS planning policy).	a. Complete CRMP, determine landowner and site-specific project objectives, inventory land resource, identify resource problems.	1.0	$0
	b. Develop site-specific resource treatment alternatives, determine environmental effects of each, estimate installation and annual maintainence costs.	1.0	$0
	c. Prepare BMP specific designs and BMP management plans for each conservation plan, obtain site-specific engineering, geomorphology, soils, and plant materials assistence where necessary.	2.0	$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Continue developing CRMP with landowner & managers to address and correct the riparian and upland resource problems (NEPA requirements met through NRCS planning policy).	2004	2004	$0

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
2. Implement BMPs and other watershed treatment measures to meet CRMP objectives.	a. Install riparian/upland jack fencing (total average cost $4/linear ft., 10,000 ft total)	1.0	$30,000	Yes
	b. Install livestock/wildlife water facilities (total average cost is $3000 ea., 2 total)	2.0	$2,250	Yes
	c. Install in-stream grade control structures (total average cost is $1,500/ea., 5 total)	3.0	$0	Yes
	d. Install riparian/channel vegetation (average total cost is $6/ft.., 1000 feet total)	3.0	$1,500	Yes
	e. Install heavy use area protection ramps (average total cost is $2,000 ea., 4 total)	3.0	$2,000	Yes
	f. Install cattle guard (average total cost is $5,000 ea., 1 total)	1.0	$3,750	Yes
	g. Screen irrigation ditch (average cost is $1,500, 1 total)	3.0	$0	Yes
	h. Inspect each BMP installation or application to ensure standards and specifications are met.	4.0	$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
2. Implement BMPs and other watershed treatment measures to meet CRMP objectives.	2004	2006	$15,000

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

FY 2004	FY 2005
$8,562	$7,437

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
3. Evaluate applied BMPs to ensure CRMP and watershed objectives are being met.	a. Annually inspect BMPs to ensure operation and maintainence is occuring according to applicable specifications. Evaluate post-treatment effectiveness of BMPs through stream transects, riparian vegetation surveys, up-to-date photo points.	Ongoing	$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
3. Evaluate applied BMPs to ensure CRMP and watershed objectives are being met.	2004	2006	$0

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
4. Evaluate CRMP/BMP effectiveness on riparian and upland conditions and trends, fish and wildlife habitat.	a. IDEQ will conduct water quality analysis on an ongoing basis, macroinvertebrate analysis included.	Ongoing	$0
	b. IDFG will evaluate fish populations, spawning success, and various in-stream habitat conditions (substrate, etc.) on an ongoing basis.	Ongoing	$0
	c. Annual photo points, representative stream morphology transects, riparian greeenline reaches, and other established long-term monitoring stations will be evaluated on an ongoing basis.	Ongoing	$0
	d. Collect water quality samples within CRMP area.	Ongoing	$1,500	Yes
	e. Prepare annual report for dispursment to public, BPA, agencies, etc.	Ongoing	$500
5. Enhance the public's awareness of the CRMP process in meeting holistic and ecologocally based objectives.	a. Hold annual field tours, show-casing site-specific BMP installation and cooperation of private and state land owners/managers.	Ongoing	$1,500
	b. Prepare annual reports and quarterly newsletters and other media for public, local, state, federal agencies, tribal, and other interests in the ongoing activities and cooperation in the watershed.	Ongoing	$1,500

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
4. Evaluate CRMP/BMP effectiveness on riparian and upland conditions and trends, fish and wildlife habitat.	2004	2006	$6,000
5. Enhance the public's awareness of the CRMP process in meeting holistic and ecologocally based objectives.	2004	2006	$9,000

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006
$10,500	$10,500	$10,500

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Item	Note	FY 2003 cost
Personnel	FTE: 0.15 of BRSCD staff	$1,000
Supplies	For annual reports, field tours, newsletters, etc.	$2,500
NEPA	Addressed through NRCS planning policy	$0
PIT tags	# of tags: NA	$0
Subcontractor	Water quality grab sampling	$1,500
Other	BMP installation (75% of total cost)	$39,500
		$44,500

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2003 cost	$44,500
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2003 budget request	$44,500
FY 2003 forecast from 2002	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind
NRCS	Technical, engineering, supervision	$8,000	in-kind
ISCC	Administrative, technical	$2,000	in-kind
IDFG	Technical, monitoring	$8,000	in-kind
IDEQ	Technical, monitoring	$8,000	in-kind
BRSCD	Administrative, public awareness	$4,000	in-kind
Landowner/permittee	Installation & operation costs	$13,167	cash

Other budget explanation

In-kind and cash cost-sharing reflects total over entire project!

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

REVIEW:
ISRP Preliminary Review (ISRP 2002-2)

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate

Date:
Mar 1, 2002

Comment:

A response is needed. The proposal and presentation dwell on this as a collaborative effort but are light on potential biological benefits. More specific involvement of fisheries biologists, such as at IDFG, needs to be better demonstrated. More detail needs to be provided on monitoring or links to other monitoring efforts that would provide information on native fish response. Details need to be given on prioritization of sites for restoration. See the programmatic section of this report. Is there a watershed assessment completed that specifies needed actions? Are there potential benefits of using the CRP in this area?

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Recommended Action

Date:
May 17, 2002

Comment:

Proposed work will cover 1/3 of all the private acres on Clover Creek, a location which has been identified as a TMDL stream segment. Reviewers suggest that due to the respect that other landowners have for the individual that has volunteered his land, this project could serve as a demonstration project that could lead other landowners, that are currently reluctant, to become willing to participate in similar activities. Although the proposed concept is valid, CBFWA questions the priority status of this project since the perception is that the ongoing work will continue regardless of whether BPA funds are secured. CBFWA found that most of the monitoring activities are being completed through various processes (e.g., TMDL) as well as general fish, wildlife and habitat monitoring by IDFG. CBFWA questions the appropriateness of allocating BPA funds to this proposal.

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2002-11)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Jun 7, 2002

Comment:

Fundable. This generally well-written proposal would continue and expand a commendable and relatively low cost cooperative effort to enhance riparian habitat on a portion of Clover Creek that in the long run should be capable of sustaining bull trout. Reviewers from ISRP and CBFWA agree that the demonstration function for surrounding landowners is significant. Monitoring plans seem adequate.

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund

Date:
Oct 30, 2002

Comment: